DOCSLIB.ORG

Mean Motion Resonances and the Stability of a Circumbinary Disk in a Triple Stellar System

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mean Motion Resonances and the Stability of a Circumbinary Disk in a Triple Stellar System A&A 544, A63 (2012) Astronomy DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/201219067 & c ESO 2012 Astrophysics Mean motion resonances and the stability of a circumbinary disk in a triple stellar system R. C. Domingos, O. C. Winter, and V. Carruba UNESP, Univ. Estadual Paulista, Grupo de Dinâmica Orbital e Planetologia, Guaratinguetá, SP 12516-410, Brazil e-mail: [rcassia;vcarruba]@feg.unesp.br; [email protected] Received 17 February 2012 / Accepted 21 June 2012 ABSTRACT We numerically investigated the orbital stability of a circumbinary disk in a 3-D triple stellar system. We verified that there is a stable region (protected region) in which highly eccentric and/or inclined orbits can remain stable. In this paper we identify two-body mean motion resonances as a powerful mechanism to increase the eccentricity of the particle on short time-scales (10 kyr or less) and produce a longer-lived high-eccentricity population. These resonances are of high order and have not been previously considered in triple stellar systems. We show that this powerful mechanism can lead to regions containing instabilities and gaps. This process also produces a number of highly eccentric particles whose orbits remain stable. We show that there are limit values of eccentricity and semi-major axis for an orbit to be within the stability region. These quantities represent the dynamical effects of the inner binary and third star companion on a circumbinary disk. The value of this limit depends on the system parameters and should be considered in estimates of the stability, formation, and survival of bodies in triple systems. Key words. celestial mechanics – binaries: close – protoplanetary disks 1. Introduction binary orbital plane. The test particles are initially taken on placed in a cloud of orbits. Verrier & Evans (2008)showedgaps Over the past decade the Spitzer Space Telescope (Werner in the disk and three distinct stable populations of test particles: et al. 2004) has provided complementary information about a prograde disk, a retrograde disk, and a high-inclination halo. known debris disks in multiple-star systems. Observations of pairs of main sequence stars made by Spitzer revealed sta- It is important to study what happens in debris disks to un- derstand the role of stellar companions in planet formation. A ble circumbinary disks around pairs of stars with separations ff of 0.04–5.31 AU in 14 systems (Trilling et al. 2007,seeTable4 stellar companion within 100 AU probably a ects the formation of that paper). In addition, two of these binary systems have an of giant planets (e.g., Nelson 2000; Mayer et al. 2005; Thébault additional companion. et al. 2006; and others). Another example of a debris disk in a multiple star system In this work, we extend the investigations of debris disks per- is the circumbinary disk of HD 98800. This system is a young formed by Akeson et al. (2007) and Verrier & Evans (2008). We (<10 Myr) member of the TW Hydra association (Fekel & Bopp have considered a range of inclinations for the third star and for 1993). HD 98800 has four stars in two binaries, A and B, trav- the particle’s disk. We estimate the stable region in which par- elling around each other in highly inclined and eccentric orbits. ticles can survive despite the third star’s inclination and eccen- According to Furlan et al. (2007), the observations suggests the tricity. Our goal is not to reproduce the current configuration of existence of an optically thick wall at 5.9 AU around the B com- the debris disk of HD 98800, but to sample the range of pos- ponents and an inner, empty region. However, some optically sible outcomes for different initial inclinations of the disk and thin dust orbits the B binary in a ring between 1.5 and 2 AU. the third star. The astronomical motivation for our study is to In particular, Furlan et al. (2007) have argued that the peculiar investigate whether/where the orbital stability region of a debris structure and apparent lack of gas in the HD 98800 disk suggest disk is possible around the close binary, and to show how the that this system is likely already at the debris disk stage. disk structure can be shaped by its dynamical interaction with In later studies of debris disks in triple star systems (Akeson an eccentric and inclined third star. Investigating the details of et al. 2007; Verrier & Evans 2008), the quadruple stellar system these dynamical interactions is beyond the scope of the present HD 98800 was studied as a triple system consisting of the B in- work, therefore we will focus the possible impact of the mean ner binary orbited by a third star. Akeson et al. (2007) investi- motion resonances on the disk because recent studies have men- gated the influence of a third star, with an orbital plane initially tioned them as a powerful mechanism for instabilities and gaps inclined at 10◦ with respect to the B inner binary orbital plane, in the disk, without investigating them in detail (Verrier & Evans on the HD 98800 disk. The authors found that the inclined stel- 2008; Farago & Laskar 2010). An analytical study of mean mo- lar orbit could produce a warp in the disk around the B inner tion resonances in this framework is intended to be carried out binary. Verrier & Evans (2008) considered the third star in three in the future. possible current orbital configurations of the HD 98800 system This paper is structured as follows. In Sect. 2, an overview of (Tokovinin 1999). The third star is considered to be in an or- the empirical expressions of the stability boundary applied here bital plane initially inclined at ∼143◦ with respect to the B inner is presented. In Sect. 3, we present the initial conditions for the Article published by EDP Sciences A63, page 1 of 8 A&A 544, A63 (2012) Table 1. Orbital elements of the B-A orbit of the HD 98800 system triple system. The empirical expressions for inner and outer bor- (Tokovinin 1999). ders are written as follows: a = 2.92 + 4.21e − 2.67e2 − 1.55μ a (1) Orbital Parameter I II III I B B B B a (UA) 61.9 67.6 78.6 a = 0.477 − 0.412μ − 0.708e + 0.794μ e + 0.276e2 A O A A A A A eA 0.3 0.5 0.6 ◦ − . μ 2 , ΩA ( ) 184.8 184.8 184.8 0 599 AeA aA (2) ◦ ωA ( ) 210.7 224.6 224.0 Table 2 gives the values of aO for each studied configuration. For the inner stability boundary, we found a value of ∼3.87 AU. Another approximation of the stability boundary for plane- Table 2. Outer critical semi-major axis, aO, for the three configurations tary orbits in binary systems can be obtained using the results investigated. from Domingos et al. (2006), who numerically studied the or- bital stability of a particle in the framework of the elliptic re- Authors I II III stricted three-body problem. Empirical expressions of the sta- Holman & Wiegert (1999) 10.97 7.96 7.04 bility boundaries for prograde and retrograde orbits were also Domingos et al. (2006) 11.40 8.83 8.08 derived. The authors have found aO values that agree well with Verrier & Evans (2007) 11.15 8.25 7.37 those from Holman & Wiegert (1999) and Verrier & Evans Numerical results 12.20 8.80 7.80 (2007). The results from Domingos et al. (2006)differ from pre- vious works in that the empirical expression for the outer critical Notes. The results are given in Astronomical Unit (AU). semi-major axis of the particle also depends on the eccentric- ity e of the particle. In the case of a prograde orbit, the outer semi-major axis is given by disk and the triple stellar system assumed here. In Sect. 4, we summarise the relevant results of our numerical simulations and aO = 0.4895(1 − 1.0305eA − 0.2738e)RH, (3) discuss the effects of the inner binary and third star perturba- where RH is the radius of the system’s B-A Hill’s sphere. The tions. In Sect. 5, we present a study on the identification of mean = motion resonances in the particle disk. Finally, our conclusions aO values for e 0 for each configuration of the third star are are presented in Sect. 6. shown in Table 2. Analysing Eqs. (2)and(3), the aO value strongly depends on the eA, aA and μA values when the particle is on circular orbit. 2. Stability boundary This relation may be a result of the fact that the third star’s gravi- tational perturbation on the particle can change significantly de- To study the stability boundary of a circumbinary disk in a pending on those parameters. This changes the minimum dis- triple stellar system, we have chosen the HD 98800 system. This tance between the third star and the inner binary. The third star’s system has been modelled as a triple stellar system in which gravitational perturbation on the components of the inner binary the B binary is orbited by a particle disk and a more distant third can also change, resulting in a perturbation on the particle. Thus, star. The A pair is treated as a single star disturber. the combination of these two effects must be important to the The B binary orbit has a semi-major axis of aB = 0.983 AU particle’s dynamical stability. According to Eq. (3), the critical and an eccentricity of eB = 0.7849. The solar masses of the semi-major axis aO beyond which the particle would not be sta- BpairareM1 = 0.699 and M2 = 0.582, and the mass ratio ble also depends on the e value.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Astrodynamics
    Politecnico di Torino SEEDS SpacE Exploration and Development Systems Astrodynamics II Edition 2006 - 07 - Ver. 2.0.1 Author: Guido Colasurdo Dipartimento di Energetica Teacher: Giulio Avanzini Dipartimento di Ingegneria Aeronautica e Spaziale e-mail: [email protected] Contents 1 Two–Body Orbital Mechanics 1 1.1 BirthofAstrodynamics: Kepler’sLaws. ......... 1 1.2 Newton’sLawsofMotion ............................ ... 2 1.3 Newton’s Law of Universal Gravitation . ......... 3 1.4 The n–BodyProblem ................................. 4 1.5 Equation of Motion in the Two-Body Problem . ....... 5 1.6 PotentialEnergy ................................. ... 6 1.7 ConstantsoftheMotion . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... 7 1.8 TrajectoryEquation .............................. .... 8 1.9 ConicSections ................................... 8 1.10 Relating Energy and Semi-major Axis . ........ 9 2 Two-Dimensional Analysis of Motion 11 2.1 ReferenceFrames................................. 11 2.2 Velocity and acceleration components . ......... 12 2.3 First-Order Scalar Equations of Motion . ......... 12 2.4 PerifocalReferenceFrame . ...... 13 2.5 FlightPathAngle ................................. 14 2.6 EllipticalOrbits................................ ..... 15 2.6.1 Geometry of an Elliptical Orbit . ..... 15 2.6.2 Period of an Elliptical Orbit . ..... 16 2.7 Time–of–Flight on the Elliptical Orbit . .......... 16 2.8 Extensiontohyperbolaandparabola. ........ 18 2.9 Circular and Escape Velocity, Hyperbolic Excess Speed . .............. 18 2.10 CosmicVelocities
    [Show full text]
  • Flight and Orbital Mechanics
    Flight and Orbital Mechanics Lecture slides Challenge the future 1 Flight and Orbital Mechanics AE2-104, lecture hours 21-24: Interplanetary flight Ron Noomen October 25, 2012 AE2104 Flight and Orbital Mechanics 1 | Example: Galileo VEEGA trajectory Questions: • what is the purpose of this mission? • what propulsion technique(s) are used? • why this Venus- Earth-Earth sequence? • …. [NASA, 2010] AE2104 Flight and Orbital Mechanics 2 | Overview • Solar System • Hohmann transfer orbits • Synodic period • Launch, arrival dates • Fast transfer orbits • Round trip travel times • Gravity Assists AE2104 Flight and Orbital Mechanics 3 | Learning goals The student should be able to: • describe and explain the concept of an interplanetary transfer, including that of patched conics; • compute the main parameters of a Hohmann transfer between arbitrary planets (including the required ΔV); • compute the main parameters of a fast transfer between arbitrary planets (including the required ΔV); • derive the equation for the synodic period of an arbitrary pair of planets, and compute its numerical value; • derive the equations for launch and arrival epochs, for a Hohmann transfer between arbitrary planets; • derive the equations for the length of the main mission phases of a round trip mission, using Hohmann transfers; and • describe the mechanics of a Gravity Assist, and compute the changes in velocity and energy. Lecture material: • these slides (incl. footnotes) AE2104 Flight and Orbital Mechanics 4 | Introduction The Solar System (not to scale): [Aerospace
    [Show full text]
  • New Closed-Form Solutions for Optimal Impulsive Control of Spacecraft Relative Motion
    New Closed-Form Solutions for Optimal Impulsive Control of Spacecraft Relative Motion Michelle Chernick∗ and Simone D'Amicoy Aeronautics and Astronautics, Stanford University, Stanford, California, 94305, USA This paper addresses the fuel-optimal guidance and control of the relative motion for formation-flying and rendezvous using impulsive maneuvers. To meet the requirements of future multi-satellite missions, closed-form solutions of the inverse relative dynamics are sought in arbitrary orbits. Time constraints dictated by mission operations and relevant perturbations acting on the formation are taken into account by splitting the optimal recon- figuration in a guidance (long-term) and control (short-term) layer. Both problems are cast in relative orbit element space which allows the simple inclusion of secular and long-periodic perturbations through a state transition matrix and the translation of the fuel-optimal optimization into a minimum-length path-planning problem. Due to the proper choice of state variables, both guidance and control problems can be solved (semi-)analytically leading to optimal, predictable maneuvering schemes for simple on-board implementation. Besides generalizing previous work, this paper finds four new in-plane and out-of-plane (semi-)analytical solutions to the optimal control problem in the cases of unperturbed ec- centric and perturbed near-circular orbits. A general delta-v lower bound is formulated which provides insight into the optimality of the control solutions, and a strong analogy between elliptic Hohmann transfers and formation-flying control is established. Finally, the functionality, performance, and benefits of the new impulsive maneuvering schemes are rigorously assessed through numerical integration of the equations of motion and a systematic comparison with primer vector optimal control.
    [Show full text]
  • Mercury's Resonant Rotation from Secular Orbital Elements
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Institute of Transport Research:Publications Mercury’s resonant rotation from secular orbital elements Alexander Stark a, Jürgen Oberst a,b, Hauke Hussmann a a German Aerospace Center, Institute of Planetary Research, D-12489 Berlin, Germany b Moscow State University for Geodesy and Cartography, RU-105064 Moscow, Russia The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10569-015-9633-4. Abstract We used recently produced Solar System ephemerides, which incorpo- rate two years of ranging observations to the MESSENGER spacecraft, to extract the secular orbital elements for Mercury and associated uncer- tainties. As Mercury is in a stable 3:2 spin-orbit resonance these values constitute an important reference for the planet’s measured rotational pa- rameters, which in turn strongly bear on physical interpretation of Mer- cury’s interior structure. In particular, we derive a mean orbital period of (87.96934962 ± 0.00000037) days and (assuming a perfect resonance) a spin rate of (6.138506839 ± 0.000000028) ◦/day. The difference between this ro- tation rate and the currently adopted rotation rate (Archinal et al., 2011) corresponds to a longitudinal displacement of approx. 67 m per year at the equator. Moreover, we present a basic approach for the calculation of the orientation of the instantaneous Laplace and Cassini planes of Mercury. The analysis allows us to assess the uncertainties in physical parameters of the planet, when derived from observations of Mercury’s rotation. 1 1 Introduction Mercury’s orbit is not inertially stable but exposed to various perturbations which over long time scales lead to a chaotic motion (Laskar, 1989).
    [Show full text]
  • SATELLITES ORBIT ELEMENTS : EPHEMERIS, Keplerian ELEMENTS, STATE VECTORS
    www.myreaders.info www.myreaders.info Return to Website SATELLITES ORBIT ELEMENTS : EPHEMERIS, Keplerian ELEMENTS, STATE VECTORS RC Chakraborty (Retd), Former Director, DRDO, Delhi & Visiting Professor, JUET, Guna, www.myreaders.info, [email protected], www.myreaders.info/html/orbital_mechanics.html, Revised Dec. 16, 2015 (This is Sec. 5, pp 164 - 192, of Orbital Mechanics - Model & Simulation Software (OM-MSS), Sec 1 to 10, pp 1 - 402.) OM-MSS Page 164 OM-MSS Section - 5 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------43 www.myreaders.info SATELLITES ORBIT ELEMENTS : EPHEMERIS, Keplerian ELEMENTS, STATE VECTORS Satellite Ephemeris is Expressed either by 'Keplerian elements' or by 'State Vectors', that uniquely identify a specific orbit. A satellite is an object that moves around a larger object. Thousands of Satellites launched into orbit around Earth. First, look into the Preliminaries about 'Satellite Orbit', before moving to Satellite Ephemeris data and conversion utilities of the OM-MSS software. (a) Satellite : An artificial object, intentionally placed into orbit. Thousands of Satellites have been launched into orbit around Earth. A few Satellites called Space Probes have been placed into orbit around Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, etc. The Motion of a Satellite is a direct consequence of the Gravity of a body (earth), around which the satellite travels without any propulsion. The Moon is the Earth's only natural Satellite, moves around Earth in the same kind of orbit. (b) Earth Gravity and Satellite Motion : As satellite move around Earth, it is pulled in by the gravitational force (centripetal) of the Earth. Contrary to this pull, the rotating motion of satellite around Earth has an associated force (centrifugal) which pushes it away from the Earth.
    [Show full text]
  • 2. Orbital Mechanics MAE 342 2016
    2/12/20 Orbital Mechanics Space System Design, MAE 342, Princeton University Robert Stengel Conic section orbits Equations of motion Momentum and energy Kepler’s Equation Position and velocity in orbit Copyright 2016 by Robert Stengel. All rights reserved. For educational use only. http://www.princeton.edu/~stengel/MAE342.html 1 1 Orbits 101 Satellites Escape and Capture (Comets, Meteorites) 2 2 1 2/12/20 Two-Body Orbits are Conic Sections 3 3 Classical Orbital Elements Dimension and Time a : Semi-major axis e : Eccentricity t p : Time of perigee passage Orientation Ω :Longitude of the Ascending/Descending Node i : Inclination of the Orbital Plane ω: Argument of Perigee 4 4 2 2/12/20 Orientation of an Elliptical Orbit First Point of Aries 5 5 Orbits 102 (2-Body Problem) • e.g., – Sun and Earth or – Earth and Moon or – Earth and Satellite • Circular orbit: radius and velocity are constant • Low Earth orbit: 17,000 mph = 24,000 ft/s = 7.3 km/s • Super-circular velocities – Earth to Moon: 24,550 mph = 36,000 ft/s = 11.1 km/s – Escape: 25,000 mph = 36,600 ft/s = 11.3 km/s • Near escape velocity, small changes have huge influence on apogee 6 6 3 2/12/20 Newton’s 2nd Law § Particle of fixed mass (also called a point mass) acted upon by a force changes velocity with § acceleration proportional to and in direction of force § Inertial reference frame § Ratio of force to acceleration is the mass of the particle: F = m a d dv(t) ⎣⎡mv(t)⎦⎤ = m = ma(t) = F ⎡ ⎤ dt dt vx (t) ⎡ f ⎤ ⎢ ⎥ x ⎡ ⎤ d ⎢ ⎥ fx f ⎢ ⎥ m ⎢ vy (t) ⎥ = ⎢ y ⎥ F = fy = force vector dt
    [Show full text]
  • Orbital Mechanics
    Orbital Mechanics Part 1 Orbital Forces Why a Sat. remains in orbit ? Bcs the centrifugal force caused by the Sat. rotation around earth is counter- balanced by the Earth's Pull. Kepler’s Laws The Satellite (Spacecraft) which orbits the earth follows the same laws that govern the motion of the planets around the sun. J. Kepler (1571-1630) was able to derive empirically three laws describing planetary motion I. Newton was able to derive Keplers laws from his own laws of mechanics [gravitation theory] Kepler’s 1st Law (Law of Orbits) The path followed by a Sat. (secondary body) orbiting around the primary body will be an ellipse. The center of mass (barycenter) of a two-body system is always centered on one of the foci (earth center). Kepler’s 1st Law (Law of Orbits) The eccentricity (abnormality) e: a 2 b2 e a b- semiminor axis , a- semimajor axis VIN: e=0 circular orbit 0<e<1 ellip. orbit Orbit Calculations Ellipse is the curve traced by a point moving in a plane such that the sum of its distances from the foci is constant. Kepler’s 2nd Law (Law of Areas) For equal time intervals, a Sat. will sweep out equal areas in its orbital plane, focused at the barycenter VIN: S1>S2 at t1=t2 V1>V2 Max(V) at Perigee & Min(V) at Apogee Kepler’s 3rd Law (Harmonic Law) The square of the periodic time of orbit is proportional to the cube of the mean distance between the two bodies. a 3 n 2 n- mean motion of Sat.
    [Show full text]
  • The Pennsylvania State University Multiple Rendezvous Maneuvers at Synchronous Altitude
    THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY MULTIPLE RENDEZVOUS MANEUVERS AT SYNCHRONOUS ALTITUDE BY EDWARD J. CREEHAN, JR. (NASA-CR-142601) - MULTIPLE RENDEZVOUS N75-20423 MANEUVERS AT SYNCHRONOUS ALTITUDE -. S. Thesis (Pennsylvania State Univ.) 54 p HC $4.25 CSCL 22C . Unclas G3/1.3 18.594 .. ASTRONAUTICS RESEARCH REPORT NO. 75-1 - MARCH 1975 DEPARTMENT OF AEROSPACE ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY PARK, PENNSYLVANIA RESEARCH PARTIALLY SUPPORTED BY NASA GRANT NSG- 7078 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to express his gratitude to Dr. Marshall H. Kaplan, Associate Professor of Aerospace Engineering, thesis advisor, for his help in the development of the problem and his invaluable aid and encouragement during the researching and writing of this thesis. The author also wishes to acknowledge the United States Air Force for the opportunity to conduct this research through the Bootstrap program. The work reported here was partially supported by NASA Grant NSG-7078. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . .............. ii LIST OF TABLES. ... .............. ... iv LIST OF FIGURES ................... v NOMENCLATURE . ... ..... ........ ... vi ABSTRACT . .... ......... ............. Viii I. INTRODUCTION . .. 1 1.1 General Introduction . ...... ...... 1 1.2 Objective. ..... ..... ...... ... 2 II. PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS . ... ........ 3 2.1 Rendezvous . 3 2.2 Perturbations. .. .. ...... 4 III. DESCRIPTION OF APPROACH . ............. 9 3.1 Initial Configuration. ...... 9 3.2 Transfer Orbits. ........... 12 3.3 Assumptions and Definitions . .. 16 IV. ANALYTICAL DEVELOPMENT. ................. 20 4.1 Coordinates and Constraints. ..... ........ 20 4.2 Transfer Equations . .. 22 4.3 Rendezvous Equations ... ......... 28 4.4 Terminal Rendezvous . .... ........ 30 V.. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS. .. ...... o 33 5.1 Numerical Results. .. 33 5.2 Sequencing Considerations . 40 VI. CONCLUSIONS . 44 REFERENCES. .................. ... 46 iv LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1 Synchronous Satellite Sample Data ...
    [Show full text]
  • A Fast Method to Identify Mean Motion Resonances
    MNRAS 000,1{8 (2017) Preprint 1 September 2021 Compiled using MNRAS LATEX style file v3.0 A fast method to identify mean motion resonances E. Forg´acs-Dajka1;2,? Zs. S´andor1;3, and B. Erdi´ 1 1Department of Astronomy, E¨otv¨os Lor´and University, P´azm´any P´eter s´et´any 1/A, H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 2Wigner RCP of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, 29-33 Konkoly-Thege Mikl´os Str, H-1121 Budapest, Hungary 3Konkoly Observatory, Research Centre for Astronomy and Earth Sciences, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, H-1121 Budapest, Konkoly Thege Mikl´os´ut15-17., Hungary Accepted 2018 March 7. Received 2018 March 7; in original form 2018 January 3 ABSTRACT The identification of mean motion resonances in exoplanetary systems or in the Solar System might be cumbersome when several planets and large number of smaller bodies are to be considered. Based on the geometrical meaning of the resonance variable, an efficient method is introduced and described here, by which mean motion resonances can be easily find without any a priori knowledge on them. The efficiency of this method is clearly demonstrated by using known exoplanets engaged in mean motion resonances, and also some members of different families of asteroids and Kuiper-belt objects being in mean motion resonances with Jupiter and Neptune respectively. Key words: celestial mechanics { methods: numerical { (stars:) planetary systems 1 INTRODUCTION two massive planets are in resonance but with only one criti- cal argument librating (Vogt et al. 2005), and HD 73526, also As a result of the ongoing discoveries, the number of exo- with one librating critical argument (Tinney et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Aas 17-291 Constrained Low-Thrust Satellite Formation-Flying Using Relative Orbit Elements
    AAS 17-291 CONSTRAINED LOW-THRUST SATELLITE FORMATION-FLYING USING RELATIVE ORBIT ELEMENTS Lukas M. Steindorf,* Simone D’Amico,† Julian Scharnagl,‡ Florian Kempf,§ and Klaus Schilling¶ This paper proposes a continuous low-thrust guidance and control strategy for constrained satellite formation-flying in perturbed orbits of arbitrary eccentricity. The controller feeds back mean relative orbit elements (ROE) and is based on Lyapunov theory. A novel feedback gain matrix, which enables the spacecraft to autonomously apply thrust at fuel efficient locations is presented. The guidance strategy makes use of a reference governor, which is designed in ROE state-space in order to ensure that all constraints imposed on the formation-flying mission are satisfied. The reference governor can enforce wall, thrust and time constraints. To achieve near-optimal fuel consumption, an autonomous algorithm to leverage Ke- plerian dynamics is developed. Orbit perturbations include the differential Earth oblateness effect J2 and aerodynamic drag. The control and guidance strategy is developed for the nanosatellite formation-flying mission NetSat, which is devel- oped by the Zentrum fur¨ Telematik e.V. NetSat will launch four identical space- craft into a low Earth orbit to demonstrate fully autonomous guidance, navigation and control with low-thrust electrical propulsion. INTRODUCTION Low-thrust guidance and control of the relative motion between multiple spacecraft is a field of study with increasing importance, as future formation-flying missions follow the miniaturization trend of spacecraft. Particularly, strategies for relative position control must address limited thrust- ing and propellant capabilities while maintaining operational aspects, such as collision safety and time constraints. One such mission is NetSat,1 a nanosatellite (cubesat) formation mission created by the Zentrum fur¨ Telematik e.V., which intends to prove the feasibility to operate a formation of four spacecraft as an enabling technology for scientific experiments, as well as commercial appli- cations.
    [Show full text]
  • Two-Line Element Estimation Using Machine Learning 3
    manuscript No. (will be inserted by the editor) Two-Line Element Estimation Using Machine Learning Rasit Abay1 · Sudantha Balage1 · Melrose Brown1 · Russell Boyce1 Received: date / Accepted: date Abstract Two-line elements are widely used for space operations to predict the orbit with a moderate accuracy for 2-3 days. Local optimization methods, such as the nonlinear least squares method with differential corrections, can estimate a TLE as long as there exists an initial estimate that provides the desired precision. Global optimization methods to estimate TLEs are compu- tationally intensive, and estimating a large number of them is prohibitive. In this paper, the feasibility of estimating TLEs using machine learning methods is investigated. First, a Monte-Carlo approach to estimate a TLE, when there are no initial estimates that provide the desired precision, is introduced. The proposed Monte-Carlo method is shown to estimate TLEs with root mean square errors below 1 km for space objects with varying area-to-mass ratios and orbital characteristics. Second, gradient boosting decision trees and fully- connected neural networks are trained to map orbital evolution of space ob- jects to the associated TLEs using 8 million publicly available TLEs from the US space catalog. The desired precision in the mapping to estimate a TLE is achieved for one of the three test cases, which is a low area-to-mass ratio space object. Keywords Two-line elements · TLE · Machine learning · Orbit determination 1 Introduction Two-line element sets (TLEs) and Simplified General Perturbations #4 (SGP4) are widely used for space operations to predict trajectories of space objects Rasit Abay E-mail: [email protected] 1University of New South Wales, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory 2600, Aus- tralia arXiv:1902.04189v2 [physics.space-ph] 3 Jun 2019 2 Rasit Abay et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Equivalent Delta-V Per Orbit of Gravitational Perturbations∗
    Equivalent delta-v per orbit of gravitational perturbations∗ Martin Laray Polytechnic University of Madrid – UPM, 28040 Madrid, Spain Accepted: January 5, 2016 Nomenclature a = semi-major axis (orbital element); length unit C= subindex for a term derived from the Coriolis effect c= subindex for a term derived from the centrifugal forces D= subindex for disturbing function e = eccentricity (orbital element); dimensionless f = true anomaly; rad G = angular momentum vector per unit of mass; (length unit)2=time unit I = inclination (orbital element); rad J = impulse per unit of mass (delta-v); length unit/time unit J2 = zonal harmonic coefficient of the second degree; dimensionless K= subindex for Keplerian k = unit vector in the z direction; dimensionless M = mean anomaly; rad N = reference system’s rotation rate; rad/time unit N = modulus of N; rad/time unit n = orbit mean motion n = pµ/a3; rad/time unit p = conic parameter p = aη2; length unit ∗Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, in press, http://arc.aiaa.org/loi/jgcd Copyright c 2016 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc. All rights re- served. yResearcher. Space Dynamics Group, ETSI Aeronauticos,´ Pz. Cardenal Cisneros 3, Associate Fellow AIAA. 1 q = auxiliary symbol of order 1; dimensionless r = radius from the earth’s center of mass; length unit r = distance from the earth’s center of mass; length unit S = scalar part of the impulse in the rotating frame; length unit/time unit t = time V = gravity potential; (length unit)2=(time unit)2 x; y; z = Cartesian
    [Show full text]